Critic Review - Chicago Reader

An accomplished, effective, grisly, and exceptionally sick slasher film that I can't with any conscience recommend, because the purposes to which it places its considerable ingenuity are ultimately rather foul.

February 5, 2007 Full Review Source: Chicago Reader | Comments (78)
Chicago Reader
Top Critic IconTop Critic

Comments

Atticus is HIGHLY TENSE

Jesse Moore

Dude, seriously... Get some f-ing balls man.

Mar 19 - 08:40 PM

RocketMan

rami yousif

Slasher film? Me thinks you have no idea what a slasher film is. Jeez the stupidity..

Oct 2 - 03:17 AM

Bardego

Robert Hamer

You pretentious, self-righteous, unprincipled little ****.

Jun 16 - 09:35 PM

ItalianIrishman

Brandon McGrath

This movie was barely a slasher at all. I think you're a big ol' wussy.

Jul 4 - 05:47 PM

stevemurphy7878

steve murphy

so you think its good but dark and it gets a rotten? go smoke some pole you mangy butt pirate

Jul 18 - 12:34 PM

girlinterruptedx

Lee Holloway

Aug 15 - 07:37 AM

Tommy_Boy

Tom Danger

You hear that? ...That's the sound of the world hating you.

Sep 7 - 06:15 AM

Darule17

Darryl Gagnon

wat the **** is wrong with you?? almost every classic your ****ing idiot. Seriously you suck at being a critic!!

Oct 1 - 10:31 PM

jackactionflash

Jack Flash

Hey Jonathan, guess what? You're a wuss and a bad critic.

Oct 23 - 11:54 PM

Double.Dubs

Edward Stymest

guys, GUYS! give the little guy a break, he was probably overwhelmed by the gore and violence to enjoy the movie cause hes a little ****, so back off

Nov 25 - 04:55 PM

Oscaru

Oscar Upchurch

Geez I was going to bash you, but it appears everyone else took care of that.

Dec 24 - 08:45 AM

Michael Alvarez

Michael Alvarez

hahahahahahaha that cracked me up

Jan 3 - 05:31 PM

qurary88

andre martin

My, notice how none of the good reviews get many comments. My advice GET A LIFE PEOPLE!

Jan 14 - 10:33 AM

Peter W.

Peter Winters

you first

May 4 - 05:16 PM

Katherine Woods

Katherine Woods

agreed with qurary88

Dec 17 - 12:32 AM

JazzyJBo

J Bo

???????????

Mar 16 - 10:47 AM

gertflump

Matthew Schwer

'Accomplished', 'effective', 'considerable ingenuity', 'talent to spare': these descriptions and compliments are the last thing I'd expect any honest film critic to spout about a film they give a rotten designation.

Perhaps you should let the minds behind the film reveal the intended thematic content. Did you notice that some of the more brutal killings in the film involved men (the two who die in the Lecter cell scene)?

Do you know what a slasher film is?

Apr 2 - 12:27 AM

SpongeShelford

Travis Sponge

You have got to be kidding me. A slasher film is a film in which people are killed in overly violent and unprovoked ways. Three people are actually killed on screen.

You have the two officers. They weren't quite overly violent. They treated Lecter like crap, so why not? He had to make sure they wouldn't catch him. Also, he had to scalp Sergent Tate (I think), it might be Pembry though, so that he can successfully escape. It was so beautifully done. They practically let him out.

Third person killed on screen is Jame "Buffalo Bill" Gumb. Definitely not unprovoked. He was going to kill Clarice. So she killed him. And she just shot him, that's not overly violent.

By the way, not one woman is flayed on screen. Lecter was such a complex character, you can't call this a slasher film. Whoever hired you at the Chicago Reader is a clod.

Jun 7 - 06:36 AM

therapistqqmore

**** you

you ****ing **** sucker a ****ing breeee /bump

Jun 25 - 02:39 AM

a review you can't refuse

Alex Mann

you should watch hostel.... then lets see you call this An accomplished, effective, grisly, and exceptionally sick slasher film

Jul 12 - 04:53 PM

HydroPink

Kerrigan NoneOfYourBusiness

I noticed this particular critic has a slight habit of contradicting himself. He says this movie is "accomplished", yet it is heavily implied that he doesn't consider it worth watching. And, as far as being a slasher flick... Well, I don't know what movie he saw but it sure isn't what the rest of us watched. As was previously stated in another comment, only three people were killed on screen. They hardly qualify as abnormal deaths, as it is. People are shot and beaten to death every day.

About the father-daughter bond thing, that's doesn't even make sense. Fathers don't usually lust after their daughters, do they? Didn't think so. Lector implied, on more than one occasion, that he was sexually attracted to Starling.

And I find it rather insulting that this critic would label Lector as merely a 'psycho', when his character has so much more depth.

Also, I (along with many other movie goers, I'm sure) beg to differ about the comment of "not even the best performances and direction". If they "weren't the best", then how would one explain the numerous awards the cast and movie as a whole has won? I believe the little trophies speak for themselves...

In conclusion, I can safely say that this critic has a poor taste in movies and should think twice before submitted such a halfassed review.

Jul 16 - 07:45 AM

frozensilver

Patrick Dunne

I think it's kind of unfair to bash a critic because they gave it a bad review, but it seems to me that the reason you didn't like the film was because of its blood/gore.

This film has substance and great acting, dialouge, etc. It's kind of unfair to overlook all of that.

Sep 3 - 07:12 PM

Luigi McCohan

Luigi McCohan

What the hell is wrong with you?

Oct 10 - 04:10 PM

Traci C.

Traci Clark

Have you been fired yet or still hanging on?

Dec 15 - 07:46 PM

Find us on:                     
Help | About | Jobs | Critics Submission | Press | API | Licensing | Mobile